Is Every Prime Factor of a Composite Number Less Than or Equal to sqrt(n)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter annoymage
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
8 replies · 2K views
annoymage
Messages
360
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If n is a composite number, the n has prime factor nor exceeding sqrt(n)

Homework Equations



n/a

The Attempt at a Solution



what did it mean by "nor exceeding sqrt(n)", is it, it must be less than sqrt(n)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
is it suppose to mean

If n is a composite number, then n has prime factor not exceeding sqrt(n) ??
 
annoymage said:
is it suppose to mean

If n is a composite number, then n has prime factor not exceeding sqrt(n) ??

Yes. If p is the prime factor show p<=sqrt(n).
 
can you check my proof please,

since n is composite number, so n>3, so by fundamental theorem of arithmetic n can be written by product of primes, say [tex]pp_1p_2...p_k=n[/tex], so let [tex]p_1p_2...p_k=a\ ,\ where\ a<n[/tex] and assume [tex]p \leq a[/tex] without loss generality, so we get [tex]pa=n\ ,\ 3<p \leq a<n[/tex], so suppose [tex]p>\sqrt{n}[/tex], then [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] then [tex]ap>\sqrt{n}\sqrt{n}=n[/tex] contradiction. is it okay?

but it seems something wrong when i assume [tex]p \leq a[/tex], because if [tex]a \leq p[/tex] we get [tex]3<a \leq p<n[/tex] and i can't conclude [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] right? help T_T
 
annoymage said:
can you check my proof please,

since n is composite number, so n>3, so by fundamental theorem of arithmetic n can be written by product of primes, say [tex]pp_1p_2...p_k=n[/tex], so let [tex]p_1p_2...p_k=a\ ,\ where\ a<n[/tex] and assume [tex]p \leq a[/tex] without loss generality, so we get [tex]pa=n\ ,\ 3<p \leq a<n[/tex], so suppose [tex]p>\sqrt{n}[/tex], then [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] then [tex]ap>\sqrt{n}\sqrt{n}=n[/tex] contradiction. is it okay?

but it seems something wrong when i assume [tex]p \leq a[/tex], because if [tex]a \leq p[/tex] we get [tex]3<a \leq p<n[/tex] and i can't conclude [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] right? help T_T

I don't why or how you want to assume p<=a. Or why the condition 3<p. Look, you got that if pa=n the either p<=sqrt(n) or a<=sqrt(n). Split into cases.
 
Dick said:
if pa=n the either p<=sqrt(n) or a<=sqrt(n). Split into cases.
i don't even tried/think to prove that, but thanks, that's a hint for me ;P, so I start to prove that first

if [tex]p \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then it is proven, if not, suppose [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] then we have [tex]ap>\sqrt{n}\sqrt{n}=n[/tex], contradiction. then
Dick said:
if pa=n the either p<=sqrt(n) or a<=sqrt(n)
.

so If [tex]p \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then the question is proven,

and If [tex]a \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex], so [tex]p_1p_2...p_k \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then
[tex]p_1 \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex], then finished, is it ok now?
 
annoymage said:
i don't even tried/think to prove that, but thanks, that's a hint for me ;P, so I start to prove that first

if [tex]p \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then it is proven, if not, suppose [tex]a>\sqrt{n}[/tex] then we have [tex]ap>\sqrt{n}\sqrt{n}=n[/tex], contradiction. then .

so If [tex]p \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then the question is proven,

and If [tex]a \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex], so [tex]p_1p_2...p_k \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex] then
[tex]p_1 \leq \sqrt{n}[/tex], then finished, is it ok now?

Yes, now it looks ok.